Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host)

Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> Mon, 13 November 2017 02:53 UTC

Return-Path: <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D5BB128ACA; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 18:53:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GYnMfgpMxCzf; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 18:53:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm0-x236.google.com (mail-wm0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 526A8127B52; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 18:53:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wm0-x236.google.com with SMTP id l8so6550776wmg.4; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 18:53:50 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=XGgSlWzVw+OpXakscqi21JLHL3JKz+XcmWeasVwALz4=; b=jBRy/mIkbMlJgitqBfY+isZlQQMTrRotQ7HpGd6zUKfIdqA/c3oF+OuKPjBBxwFdE2 tDGme3bRQROxiT9375WFT48XEm1ZNx8ACfUMNZKnFnr6fPkSN2lezB5KvEQ3Vi+t0+4E DxHK5s+H1KAXiWvk7NxCs1W2a29jw3zzPyDciu9LIsEujL+xnyADjQORLJwBqi2HOumS 37CTCuVxswWhcpkvi5tyU1QLjW+XZL9c9mKqV1O/TD5pRsqjFLMyPAXBiuUxmZgTMs3b OOdTsC/4syLdTyI+SgVDogGIU4sffaCBznCjM4FMZFti48BRT5D6cfj/8QtYWP5VTBZ+ wi0g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=XGgSlWzVw+OpXakscqi21JLHL3JKz+XcmWeasVwALz4=; b=pC/XC8eqW/tqmD7mvW1lQRHypd3TXB/2IhwLKqEv40t6Y4wwfqES69aC3sJoRXk/ar bf8eI5Np8fO8CpsEAm5nDsuf3c6ln+Lo/eZEVvYtEqKzzwXaCi4BASyDvilRb2ROQuOA adL6hwv5mmQQJyNeA4Fj9au18UNDfH0C4myO7fXXeKNO4t3p3dpsxMd6Jc1M7lejpCrf 0nb6UNlEWgUIV8KE/eTLg5vjdrH6aXiQSPRJ7/cwnPXdpx7WRrzikLjSrDjejy3skS3p PntAXft7R8C3xz2ZG9usC7d6kPG8LInj62Z/ji6hcsmSyoLZUIJIgk/dNLMly0dLBmNl Sp4w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX4vZquzCoTZU4gVHbz+cH+N/dgNS1s9u+BJGT9B7F03d/2d+U7k C1hS8MgpB7E8DMi7pOzaHSs=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMayxD/UByC8SfAAJqRdMl17H52KOwl4xROg0CuOdXg75YCYBBwdbvG0A7mTErV7S7WHyufDRw==
X-Received: by 10.28.29.21 with SMTP id d21mr2755140wmd.93.1510541628923; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 18:53:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:67c:370:128:1d89:6327:9256:69ce? ([2001:67c:370:128:1d89:6327:9256:69ce]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e131sm12582887wmg.1.2017.11.12.18.53.46 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 12 Nov 2017 18:53:48 -0800 (PST)
From: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <C4A910E8-5103-41D9-902F-B2B834543DF8@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_DBBCB0C1-5B62-4E92-9522-EAE7D3C800EA"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Stateful SLAAC (draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host)
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 10:53:43 +0800
In-Reply-To: <E67105A3-396B-403C-B741-E9E01CFB5CE7@employees.org>
Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>, "v6ops@ietf.org WG" <v6ops@ietf.org>
To: =?utf-8?Q?Ole_Tr=C3=B8an?= <otroan@employees.org>
References: <be9724f5-2ff5-d90c-2749-ecae2c628b78@si6networks.com> <CAKD1Yr0_a2Qm8U4oK+BQU57DeDUD9i-o_+G+YhnH4pVXRxmxxQ@mail.gmail.com> <9d154133-a1de-7774-1589-c7069bf279ee@si6networks.com> <0b45890d-ea4a-47b8-a650-ceb72b066df8@gmail.com> <ea772bfd-4004-7f94-8469-b50e3aff0f29@si6networks.com> <F2330138-6842-4C38-B5A0-FB40BFACD038@employees.org> <e40697ca-8017-c9d2-c25d-89087046c9cf@gmail.com> <207f040a-7fe2-9434-e7a5-f546b26fdf63@strayalpha.com> <CAKD1Yr26NK2osApYZBm8Yd=0X7xcetrxojp6=JHOEAu9BB0q8A@mail.gmail.com> <8ca59610-2d25-2be4-9d2c-9b1a75fd3ace@si6networks.com> <E67105A3-396B-403C-B741-E9E01CFB5CE7@employees.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/1w6PlwTbwiN5RfBoDIK8fAv0_6k>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 02:53:52 -0000

Ole,

> On Nov 13, 2017, at 10:42 AM, Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>; wrote:
> 
> Fernando,
> 
>>> <mailto:touch@strayalpha.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>   FWIW, I would agree with that if this were an issue of WG focus creep.
>>>   AFAICT, the issue appears to go much deeper, which means it's an Area
>>>   boundary issue if it is indeed a protocol extension.
>>> 
>>>   IMO, OPS stays in the lane of suggesting sets of *existing* protocol
>>>   parameters and features, or indicates where MAYs and SHOULDs can be
>>>   relaxed (or not) - all of this remains compliant with the protocol.
>>>   Changes to the protocol should not be considered operational decisions,
>>>   again IMO.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Excuse me, but I really cannot fathom why we are saying that this draft
>>> defines a new protocol
>> 
>> Model SLAAC with a FSM for the client, and a FSM for the server. Now
>> apply this document. And look at the SLAAC router FSM.
>> 
>> Did it change (and quite a lot, actually)?  If yes, then you ahve
>> changed the protocol. If not, you didn't do the FSM properly.
> 
> Or do as I do in my implementation.
> Model each host as being on it's own point to point interface.
> Configure the IPv6 prefix on that interface. That configured state is exactly like what we have in classic SLAAC.
> 

Good point.  If the document had described this as something like creating virtual interfaces, we might not be having this discussion.

Bob